FIRM PROFILE

Since graduating from the University of Texas School of Law in 1977, Steve Smoot has actively practiced in various areas of civil litigation across the State ofTexas, but particularly in Houston and Austin. During much of the 1980's, Mr. Smoot was a trial lawyer for the State Bar of Texas in the prosecution of lawyer disciplinary cases all over the State of Texas, ultimately becoming First Assistant General Counsel and Chief Trial Lawyer for the State Bar of Texas. Since leaving the State Bar in 1989, Steve Smoot has maintained his own law practice in Austin and then in Houston, devoted to civil litigation with particular emphasis on lawyer professional responsibility - legal malpractice, legal ethics, grievance defense. Steve Smoot has represented clients in legal malpractice actions brought in other states with local attorneys as co-counsel. Below you will find a more complete list of his accomplishments.

Areas of Practice:

• Legal Malpractice
• Legal Ethics
• Grievance Defense
• Business Litigation

Bar Admissions:

• State of Texas
• United States Supreme Court
• United States Court of Appeals 5^th Circuit
• United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

Education:

• University of Texas School of Law, Juris Doctor 1977
• Washburn University, Bachelor of Arts summa cum laude 1974

Professional Associations:

• American Bar Association
• State Bar of Texas
• Texas Bar Foundation
• Houston Bar Association
• Fort Bend County Bar Association
• Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers
• Texas Center for Legal Ethics and Professionalism

Notable Professional Responsibility Cases:

• Lederman v. Prudential Life Insurance Company of America, Inc., 385 N.J.Super. 324, 897 A.2d 373 (N.J.Super. 2006, petition denied) - Representing 6 former clients of New York law firm/former employees of Prudential in suit to set aside settlement of employment discrimination claims negotiated by law firm and Prudential, where New Jersey appellate court held that claim was not subject to mandatory arbitration and should not be dismissed without providing clients/employees discovery.

• Burrow v. Arce, 997 S.W.3d 229 (Tex. 1999), rev'g in part and aff'd in part, Arce v. Burrow, 956 S.W.2^d 239 (Tex.App.- Houston 1997) - Represented 46 former clients of five prominent plaintiffs lawyers where Supreme Court of Texas held that former clients could pursue a cause of action for fee forfeiture for breach of fiduciary duty even in the absence of actual harm to the clients.

• O'Quinn v. State Bar of Texas, 763 S.W.2d 397 (Tex. 1988) - Represented State Bar in a lawyer disciplinary case, where Supreme Court of Texas sustained constitutionality of disciplinary rule proscribing case running against attack that the disciplinary rule allegedly violated the First Amendment.